MORSE OPERATIONS, INC., D/B/A BAYVIEW CADILLAC, PETITIONER,
v.
SONAR RADIO CORPORATION, RESPONDENT
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Morse Operations seeks review of a trial court order denying its motion to stay proceedings pending arbitration of a dispute with Sonar Radio Corporation. The court holds that an arbitration clause in the original buyer's order was not superseded by a later installment sale contract that lacked such a clause, and the parties' dispute must be arbitrated as contemplated in their agreement.
The arbitration clause in the original buyer's order was not superseded by the subsequent installment sale contract. The parties contemplated that additional financing documents would be executed when they signed the buyer's order, and the financing agreement was merely a financing device, not a replacement of the underlying purchase contract. Therefore, the parties' disputes must be arbitrated as provided in the buyer's order.
[1] An installment sale contract, entered into after a buyer's order for a vehicle, does not necessarily supersede the buyer's order if the buyer's order contemplates additio…
[2] A buyer's order for a vehicle, which explicitly states it supersedes prior agreements and comprises the complete agreement, may still be subject to subsequent financing a…
Previewing 2 of 3 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“ANY CONTROVERSY OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, OR THE BREACH THEREOF, SHALL BE SETTLED BY ARBITRATION IN SOUTHEAST FLORIDA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION”
The arbitration clause contained in the original buyer's order that the parties agreed to for resolving disputes.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn July 30, 1981, Sonar Radio Corporation signed a buyer's order for a new Cadillac containing an arbitration provision requiring disputes to be settl…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Arbitration Provision cases and more on FLexlaw
DELL, Judge.
Petitioner Morse Operations, Inc., d/b/a Bayview Cadillac seeks review by certiorari of an order denying its motion to stay until arbitrated.
On July 30, 1981, respondent Sonar Radio Corporation signed a buyer’s order for a new 1981 Cadillac which was duly accepted by petitioner and contained the following arbitration provision:
ANY CONTROVERSY OR CLAIM ARISING OUT OF OR RELATING TO THIS CONTRACT, OR THE BREACH THEREOF, SHALL BE SETTLED BY ARBITRATION IN SOUTHEAST FLORIDA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RULES OF THE AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION, AND JUDGMENT UPON THE AWARD RENDERED BY THE ARBITRATOR(S) MAY BE ENTERED IN ANY COURT HAVING JURISDICTION THEREOF. Respondent elected to finance the vehicle and on August 5, 1981, signed an installment sale contract. This contract did not contain an arbitration provision. After experiencing problems with the car, respondent brought suit against petitioner in the circuit court. Petitioner filed a motion to stay until arbitrated which the trial court summarily denied, and directed respondent to seek discovery.
Thereafter, the court conducted a hearing and entered its order. The order found the installment sale contract superseded the buyer’s order and denied petitioner’s motion to stay until arbitrated.
Petitioner asserts that the installment sale contract merely constituted a financing device and therefore contends the trial court erred in determining that it superseded the buyer’s order. The relevant provisions of the buyer’s' order state:
Purchaser agrees that this Order on the face and reverse side hereof and any separate credit disclosure shall include all of the terms and conditions, that this Order cancels and supersedes any prior agreement and as of this date hereof comprises the complete and exclusive statement of the terms of the agreement relating to the subject matters covered hereby, and that THIS ORDER SHALL NOT BECOME BINDING UNTIL ACCEPTED BY DEALER OR HIS AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE.
The Purchaser, before or at the time of delivery of the motor vehicle covered by this Order will execute such other forms of agreement or documents as may be required by the terms and conditions of payment indicated on the front of this Order. The plain language of these provisions demonstrate that the parties contemplated additional documents when the buyer’s order was signed and accepted. Coincidental thereto, the buyer elected to finance the vehicle through petitioner’s dealership. Had the buyer elected to pay cash, the buyer’s order would have constituted the only agreement between the parties which set the terms for the purchase of the automobile. The parties agreed to the forum to resolve any disputes concerning the vehicle. We find no support in the record for the trial court’s conclusion that the financing agreement superseded the underlying contract for this transaction.
Accordingly, we grant the petition for writ of certiorari. We quash the order of the trial court denying petitioner’s motion to stay until arbitrated and remand the cause for further proceedings consistent herewith.
ANSTEAD, C.J., and.HERSEY, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Murphy v. Courtesy Ford, L.L.C., 944 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…lo that a used car buyer was required to arbitrate her dispute with the bank even though the arbitration clause was contained in the purchase contract and not in the finance contract. Id. at 611. See also Morse Operations, Inc. v. Sonar Radio Corp., 449 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)(where the arbitration clause was contained in the buyer’s order and not in the finance or installment sale contract). Here, Murphy’s causes of action are tied directly to the purchase of the vehicle. Because her claims involve t…
-
Phoenix Motor Co. v. Desert Diamond Players Club, Inc., 144 So. 3d 694 (Fla. 4th DCA 2014)…t is ‘subject to’ the collateral document. Temple Emanu-El of Greater Fort Laud-erdale v. Tremarco Indus., Inc., 705 So. 2d 988, 984 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998) (alterations in original) (citations omitted). In Morse Operations, Inc. v. Sonar Radio Carp., 449 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984), a dealer and a purchaser executed a buyer’s order and a finance agreement for the sale of a car. After experiencing problems with the car, the purchaser brought an action against the dealer under the buyer’s order. The buyer’s o…
-
HHH Motors, LLP v. Holt, 152 So. 3d 745 (Fla. 1st DCA 2014)…apply because no valid agreement to arbitrate exists. In its motion for rehearing and written opinion, HHH Motors claims that our disposition of this case conflicts with the Fourth District’s decision in Morse Operations, Inc. v. Sonar Radio Corp., 449 So. 2d 1002 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984). That case, however, is factually different because— unlike the present case — the financing agreement at issue in Morse Operations did not have a merger clause. The absence of a merger clause justified a different result, there…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence